The end of Pritch is nigh. The sad thing being we never got to see the very best he has to offer

It’s January and the battle of the Number 10’s has once again begun but it’s not the type of battle any Norwich fan enjoys. This one is happening off the pitch and, if the rumours are true, has got off to a very bad start.

When you list the names Alex Pritchard, James Maddison and Wes Hoolahan as players all fighting for the no. 10 role in your team, it’s usually a time for optimism. It’s a time when you look at the team sheet and think “we are fortunate”… usually.

Apart from when it’s January and it feels like we’ve wasted so much of the season. A team as fortunate as ours should be terrorising teams, weakening defences to their knees and in touching distance of promotion.

But we’re not. We’re 13th in the Championship table. We’ve conceded more goals than we’re scored. And one of the trio is about to depart.

We’ve lost more games than we’ve won and albeit nine points away from promotion, I’m not exactly comforted by the 10 points from relegation. And even if we do keep ourselves distant from relegation, many have come to terms that the nine-point gap for playoffs will widen and eventually, for the second season running, the yo-yo effect of the club will only ‘yo’.

January is a horrible time of the year – if you’re anything like me, new year’s resolutions have become non-existent already (or they didn’t even exist) and the plan to watch what you’re eating flew far out of the window when you looked at the left after food from Christmas – but not only that, you spend 31 days praying your club can hold onto its best players, whilst deprive other clubs of theirs.

Daniel Farke has reiterated time after time that there was no need to sell to balance the books, to bring someone in. That the fact there’s interest in our players is only a “good sign” that we’re doing something right. But many doubt it. He even joked that if Paris St Germain came in with a £100m bid for Pritchard, he would ask for more.

January has arrived too quickly. We’ve only just seen the magic that happens when Maddison and Pritchard take to the team – in fact, Farke has found a way to make it work when he couldn’t before with Maddison and Hoolahan, and Alex Neil before that with Hoolahan and Pritchard.

Maddison and Pritchard work (or worked) on the same wavelength – for fans who love the beauty of the game and of such players, it’s almost a rewarding experience to watch them. A particular moment in the Chelsea game proved this wavelength when a 1-2-1 between them was only disrupted when Maddison was fouled, though it was obvious his run had been anticipated by Pritchard by the looks of the following pass.

Pritchard’s ability to play on the wings rarely leaves you with the same problems it did when Hoolahan played there – Pritchard has proved himself time and time again that being out of position is nothing in the great scheme of things. And if you need to show the beauty of such play – Chelsea was that game.

No striker in the matchday XI. It’s a problem. A tough problem. The plan to play a front three looked an interesting variation on the formations Farke had played before. It was risk. A massive one.

One, it was against Chelsea – it seemed most pundits predicted that would be a huge dilemma in the and could lead to Chelsea winning with no problems.

Two, it was a home game – yes, our home form hasn’t been the most consistent but under the lights at Carrow Road was still an advantage of sorts and to win against Chelsea to further into the fourth round would be a massive achievement and cheque, to take it to Stamford Bridge could mean a huge disadvantage.

The plan at the beginning of the match seemed to have been to let Josh Murphy play central with Maddison and Pritchard supporting him – what unravelled was a plan to just let those three play football. Freely.

Several times I lost track of who was playing where, but I guess that was the beauty of such thing.

A striker to begin the game would have benefitted the team, no doubt, but with Cameron Jerome supposedly still suffering from a back injury and Nelson Oliveira injuring himself in training, we had to make do.

We didn’t have a whole lot of possession in comparison to our Premier League opponents (40-60) but we had to make do and we made it count. Several times we had those ‘what if’ chances and we could have easily won.

Although some will be critical of the game finishing 0-0, it was something many would have settled for – whether that be for the trip to London in hope of repeating a similar upset to what they nearly achieved at Arsenal, or getting some much-needed cash into the club, or simply the fact we finally saw a resilient defence stand up to the task and an attacking force unafraid to have their moment – only at the consequence (for fans) to see their efforts broadcasted to the world.

We’ve seen the bids reported in the local and national papers – Pritchard’s seemingly Huddersfield bound – though having signed at Norwich for an estimated £8 million, the Terriers were playing the earliest April Fool’s joke going if they’re looking for a bargain of £5 million and refusing to pay more than £10 million. As it transpires it will ‘undisclosed’ but looks to be £11 million plus add-ons.

I’m openly biased about my views on Pritchard – I’ve followed his progress since his loan to Swindon in 2013-14 and throughout his time at Brentford, he was a player who I’ve wanted to join the Canaries for a long time, he’s a player who I’ve previously compared to a young Hoolahan (height included) and we’ve captured glimpses of that, despite being deprived of it during Alex Neil’s spell at the club.

However, he’s 24 and having seen his chance at testing himself at Premier League level go miserably wrong at West Brom, it’s understandable if he’s looking for such a move. I would like to have seen City keep hold of him until the summer but it now appear the player himself is keen on the move.

We know, although for some it’s hard to openly admit it, we’re seeing the beginning of the end of Wes Hoolahan. We knew from the start of the season that he wouldn’t be playing as much as previous seasons and we’ve seen it happen, more so since Pritchard’s return from injury. We don’t know when exactly it will be the end but to lose Pritchard and Hoolahan, who I personally believe are two very similar players would be a huge loss and disappoint.

There’s also something that is, personally for me, is one of the biggest differences between Maddison and Pritchard and one of the things I enjoy most about watching the latter and it was proved against Chelsea.

Pritchard isn’t scared. That’s a strange thing to say. But when watching Pritchard go on one of his sprints, he isn’t afraid to run at players. He rarely sees a defender in his way, even one worth more than double his transfer fee, and he finds a way through, or ensures the ball does so play can continue at the pace he’s set. It’s been something the Canaries have been lacking that Pritchard has potentially injected back into the squad.

We all know the statistic – James Maddison is the most fouled player in the Championship this season (3.71 fouls on average per game), a fairly stark comparison to the statistics of Pritchard (1.37), even at Brentford, he only recorded 2.33 fouls on average per game – but there are times when that statistic shows opponents are taking out the most threatening player, he can be bullied throughout the game but sometimes, I questioned how easily he goes down, whether he’s truly running at players in the way Pritchard has, whilst it’s frustrating to see the game stopped at crucial points.

It’s an objective thing – it may be something to agree to disagree on but we all know fouls pause games, it takes away the whole attacking tempo we have missed in the Canaries (something Pritchard had seemingly brought back) but at the same time, we all know how reliant we have become on Maddison’s set-pieces and, in the unlikely even the deal falls through, maybe it’d be time to bring back the free-kicks the 24-year-old had made a name for himself earlier on in his career.

It’s going to be a tough month. It’s already proved to be the case. And unfortunately, the time where generations of players had loyalties and stuck with teams for years has gone – it went a long time ago – and it’s potentially harder with young, hungry, attacking players.

Norwich must hold their nerve – it’s tempting to sell but they must not repeat previous sales for bargain prices.

I’m expecting a drastic change when I travel up to Norwich on February 3 for the game against Middlesbrough, I just don’t know what it will be.

Reader Interactions

Comments

The sale of Pritchard is just another indication of the inadequacy of our owners.
It is obvious to all but them that they cannot fund a championship side and if they remain in charge much longer the club will be back in division one.
The football this year is dire and yet they have the temerity to charge the eighth highest season ticket price in the entire leagues in order to subsidise their hobby.
The time is long overdue for them to address this nonsense and sell the club to more capable owners.
The fans must do their bit by refusing to be mugged into renewing their season tickets.

Yes, the football dished up this year has been too boring and painful to watch.
It’s sad to see the club in this desperate situation.
No ambition, no money and owners who seem hopelessly out of touch with football.
Norwich have always been my team but the current offerings do not warrant spending £1150 to subsidise a hobby.

Where is the guarantee that it won’t be used wisely. It’s more money than we paid for him, so was buying him in the first place not wise use of money? Yes we’ve made bad purchases as a club, name one that hasn’t, but we’ve also made some good ones.

It’s obviously disappointing to lose one of our better players but just because Maddison and Pritchard have looked quite good together against some of the lesser teams in this league doesn’t cover up the fact that you can’t play both of them against strong opposition and expect to compete in midfield. Seems like sensible money to me for someone who doesn’t have the best record with injuries and has been judged by a couple of Premier League teams not to be up to that standard. Good luck to him though.

11 million for Pritchard is not enough and Huddersfield must be laughing their heads off that they have got a talented player for that much money.But we have seen it before and will see it again that the the board cannot refuse a few quid when it’s offered to them.Who next?Wildscuts already off to Cardiff for a few months,Klose?Maddison?Murphy?The lack of ambition from the board will only go one way,downhill and while they have 20 thousand season ticket holders they won’t care.

There is bound to be a lot of negativity resulting from this transfer (and rightly so) but soon as he came back to fitness it was almost an inevitability. I think the fee of £11m rising to £14 with add ons isn’t that bad really, he has 18months left on his contract (i think) and although he is an awesome championship player, from his West Brom experience a few years ago there is no guarantee he will be a good premier league player. We know we are in a tight spot financially and things are looking down but at least this enables us to invest in new players, as long as they aren’t like the wildschut transfer (nothing against him as a player, just £7m was overpriced).. The rumours of Klose leaving to Basel might be a blessing in disguise, although our best centre back, he struggles with some of the big attackers and we have good replacements in Zimmerman and Hanley therefore could be a good opportunity to get some money whilst he still has some value and drop the wage bill significantly.

If Wildschut goes as well as Pritchard, then we are really getting short of numbers in respect of attacking players. I would have thought Wildschut, since he offers a direct attacking style, would be one player we would potentially have seen more of with Pritchard departing. I certainly don’t want Vrancic to be the only main option left.

This means the club need either to promote one or two academy players, though I’m not sure Cantwell is ready yet, as well as bring at least one further player in. In fact given our lack of striker options right now, that figure needs to be two.

Losing Pritchard is a major blow but personally I’m surprised at the amount the Terriers are prepared to pay, especially given that he clearly wants a PL move and nobody else seems to be coming in for him.

The problem from our point of view is that the power is all with the player. We could refuse all bids for him, make him stay, and have another sulky prima donna on our hands no longer giving his best. One obvious consequence of that is that poorer performances mean his price falls – and he’d still want to go in the summer.

Pritchard’s top class in the Championship, much as Wes, Howson and Snodgrass are (or were). But in the Premier League? I’m not convinced. Players in his position that are truly Premiership class normally show it young, much more so than defenders and goalkeepers. There must have been reasons that Tottenham kept loaning him out and then let him go. I believe he’ll be back in the second tier in a couple of years.

Honestly can many see Huddersfield stay up long, the 2nd season syndrome is to bite yet, plus they will have been worked out by now the run in will prove tough . Bournemouth look in danger, Southampton and Swansea after the success they have had. The best Pritchard can hope for is One and a half of seasons. Watford or Burnley would have been a better bet .

after being assured that thanks to the previous fire sale the club was under no pressure to sell, the first chancer to wave a grubby fiver and down come the knickers again.

Self financing? Simply a buzzword for asset stripping and ripping off the “community” they care so much about,

The great irony is the discrepancy between season ticket prices of the two clubs. We are paying the waitrose price only to see our delivery van diverted to the Aldi household up the road,

Indefensible and sadly probably not the end of it this January. If stone sees a buck to be made, no thought will be given regarding the impact on the team or on field performance.

For some, the occasional availablilty for a quick selfie in the pub before a match is the only criterior by which a club owner is judged. This culture and the whole ethos need to be swept out of carrow road along with anybody who,espouses or propagates it and the club brought into line with the rest of football.

So presumably you’d have priced Huddersfield (the only club interested) out of the market would you, and kept Pritchard against his will?

Personally I think we should be suing Cambridge United for the damage they’ve done to our season by kicking Pritchard out of the first 20+ games. Can’t believe we’ve “rewarded” them by allowing Phillips to go on loan there.

Yes, I agree totally with you on that one Keith B, I was rather surprised to see a player was going there quite so soon after essentially Cambridge U had kicked their way to ruining our season – they nobbled Klose too for about 6 weeks, He also only returned post the Millwall away debacle I think.

Yes. I would have made it clear that he can go in the summer. Personally I would have played him week in week out, just like the idiot Neil should have done to,showcase his ability and take advantage of his performances until May.
He would,then be free to leave and in all probability would have found a far better club than Huddersfield.

All,this,episode does is highlight the total inadequacy of the current ownership and the absolute pile of horse crap that is the “self funding model”

I said on here a few short weeks ago that we can kiss goodbye to Pritchard, Maddison Olivera and Jerome. got shouted down a bit . but that is one down I would have hoped for 12-13 million for him. Maddison next I think I would want to a bigger amount of 0’s for him. Reckon we will be seeing a few freebies and basement levels from the lower leagues, shopping in poundland after seeing the gross wasting of money

Surprised by Wildschut move, would have thought he offered another option, hasn’t been given a chance, a sure bet he is up to it if Colin wants him in Wales.

Get use to this, with the Stowmarket two still be glued to the seats nothing will change , self funding a pipe dream in this day and age, it might work in League one and League 2 . who can say we won’t be playing in the first of those leagues in the not too distant future. Bu they will still keep coming after your money in season ticket rises to come.

I think we’re all getting a little bit carried away by this. Whilst he’s a very good player who’s best may be yet to come, there are no guarantees of that.
Seems we’re making a profit on someone who, I believe, has only made 43 appearances for us.
He’s obviously not the most loyal of people, hence the reason he was with us in the first place.

If he wants to play in The Premiership, then good luck to him. Personally, I have my doubts as to whether he will succeed. I believe the Club had little or no choice here. No other bidders (which should tell you something) we will have done well if the reported fee is correct.
Having said all that, I am still a bit disappointed to see him go. But so long as the fee is used wisely, I can see the logic.

I’m hearing from pretty reliable sources that Jerome and Olivera will be off this month, too, subject ‘only’ to us getting a couple of cheap (*i.e. unproved/lower league) replacements….
Ambition? Pah!! The Smiths and their minions are bleeding the club to death by electing to sell our best assets, rather than look for external funding. That way lies loss of control…..
How I wish there was a real upswell from season ticket holders refusing to renew,but ‘lethargy rules OK’ around Carrow Road, doesn’t it? – at Board level and amongst the fans.
We get what we deserve….

Although, to be honest I wouldn’t mind selling Jerome or Oliveira. I’ve always liked CJ, who while not a Premier striker, was always effective in the Championship… until this season. I’m not convinced NO is the type of player we need. I’d cash in if we can

I’d be perfectly happy to let them both go.
One is good enough but doesn’t want to play for us, the other does want to play for us but isn’t good enough. (which is a shame!)
I’d love us to unearth a new Cody Macdonald type.

With the sale coming so early in the transfer window we have at least been spared the agony of the Bradley Johnson type eleventh hour sale on the 31st January. It would be foolish to expect any of the proceeds finding their way into Farkes hands.

As Derek states above, Pritchard is not particularly loyal, neither is he particularly discerning judging by his choice of club. I’m surprised he agreed to join so soon given the early stage of the window. At any stage a better option could appear – an injury or an unforeseen sale could force someone’s hand into showing an interest. The window usually heats up late in the month.

The pressure is now piled on the board – this sale has not gone down well unsurprisingly and the sharks are smelling blood and a willingness to trade. Should an acceptable bid be received for Maddison it could well be a bridge too far for most city fans, another downturn in results could easily follow and the Brentford reaction would seem like a tea party in comparison to the furore that will follow.

The prospective loan to Cardiff of Wildschut ads further grist to the mill. Surely warnock will get Wildschut playing. At least he can’t play against us. Further odds and sods have been loaned out already in a busy clearing of the decks. Even Naismith is strongly linked with a move to hearts, Jerome with Birmingham. Against this exodus f biblical proportions precisely the square root of bugger all is happening in the other direction. The only mildly believable link in the shape of a Nigerian full back has received a stern knock back from the player himself.

All eyes then are on Maddison, for should he be flogged the whole shooting match could come tumbling down around the cook and her pals. Who will blink first? Will the imminent need to sell season tickets render a sale out of the question? Will,the board admit public ally the season is dead? Are they weighing the prevailing mood amongst supporters before making a decision? Do they even care? The ball is in their court, stick or twist. As the great Clint Eastwood might have said “do ya feel lucky punk?”

No need to sell (in this window)? My arse – why even say ‘no need to sell’ if that’s what we go and do. We still have a chance of making a play off position (I know it’s unlikely) so why not wait till the summer to sell Pritchard. If £11 million is the fee, then it’s too low given the money swirling around the premiership at the moment. We get a small bit of hope (and even beauty) seeing Pritchard and Maddison together and then comes an offer we should have refused….ah well the era that started with Lambert and which gave us a lot of excitement over the years has almost certainly come to an end – I can see mid to lower table mediocrity for some time, falling attendances and perhaps doing an Ipswich.

As much as I have liked having local owners, I feel they have missed a trick each time that we were promoted to establish ourselves we needed to spend more – but then it’s not my money.

With the expansion of the city and sell outs most weeks for a while there is (or was, unless we can get back again) clearly the potential to expand the stadium too (and thus the matchday income). To do more than survive I think we have to look at outside investment – it’s difficult to believe that no one is interested in putting in more money to our club – the potential is there. Still with that comes the risk of owners like the Venkys.

I feel disappointed and let down by Pritchard’s transfer. I can only hope that we do find good replacements, that Webber is as good as his hype and that Farke can learn to vary our often ponderous possession game and get good replacements. As for next season’s season ticket – well I get pensioner rates for the first time so I might just hang in there even if it is by default.

Disclaimer: The information on this website consists of personal opinions. Whilst we have taken all reasonable steps to ensure that the information contained on these Web pages is accurate and correct at the time of writing we do not accept any liability whatsover for any loss or damage caused by reliance on this information.

We do not accept any responsibility for information contained in other websites to which this site links. We strongly advise users to check any information before acting or relying on it.